Get Energy Smart! NOW!

Despite $100s of millions spent to obfuscate the issue, the reality of the Keystone XL pipeline is that it is NOT in the U.S. national interest.

Keystone XL will:

• Increase climate risks
• Worsen environmental damage in Alberta, CA, due to increased tar sands exploitation
• Increase gasoline and diesel prices for most Americans
• Hurt American economic competitiveness (due to increased pressure on US fuel prices and lower pressure on world oil prices)
• Undermine our path to a clean-energy future
• Undermine and discredit any U.S. efforts to lead on climate change issues internationally

Keystone XL will NOT have all the miraculous benefits claimed by the Koch Brothers, American Petroleum Institute, Faux News, Grand Oil Party elites, and other fossil-foolish interests.

Additionally, for Democratic Party interests, the answer is even starker: Approving Keystone XL will further enrich and empower those who are spending recklessly (thank you SCOTUS and Citizens United) to undermine American democracy. Not least of which is the Koch Brothers, who will likely benefit to the tune of $billions in additional wealth if Keystone XL is approved.

Is @PepsiCo upset that @NRSC & @GOP are addicted to Koch? http://t.co/Bav1v7ABdO @SenatorReid #KochBrothers

— A Siegel (@A_Siegel) March 5, 2014

This point, of course, is not one that should sway the Department of State analysis of the project … but it should impassion you to add your voice to the discussion.

All of us should add our voices to the State Department comment period.

After the fold is an overview of some of the reasons and arguments that you might choose to make.

In short, the question the Department of State must answer:

Is Keystone XL in the U.S. national interest?

And, more briefly, the answer:

No.

With more complete explanations below, here are just some of the reasons why Keystone XL is a reckless, dangerous, and counter-productive project that should not be allowed to proceed.

In short, Keystone XL would

• Contribute to increased greenhouse gas emissions;
• Foster accelerated damage to one of the most important carbon sinks;
• Create risks for water sources;
• Facilitate expansion of the most destructive industrial project on earth;
• Increase spill risks of extremely difficult to clean-up and damaging Dilbit in extremely sensitive ecosystems;
• Divert resources from efforts to reduce American and global dependence on fossil fuels;
• Threaten employment;
• Damage economic performance;
• Threaten American health;
• Increase gas prices for much of the American Heartland;
• Increase profitability of oil interests ripping up the boreal forests by taking money out of Americans’ pockets; and,
• Damage American leadership around the globe as we struggle to mitigate climate change.

If this seems a long list, it is.

Despite the $10s ($100s) of millions spent on partial truths, disinformation, and propaganda, the fundamental facts demonstrate that this project should not go forward, that it is counter to U.S. national interest.

Crippling drought. Devastating wildfires. Superstorm Sandy. Climate has come home – and the American people get it.

The first step to putting our country on the path to addressing the climate crisis is for President Obama to reject the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline. His legacy as president will rest squarely on his response, resolve, and leadership in solving the climate crisis.

Let us take a moment to ‘review’ the bidding as to why Keystone XL pipeline is not in the national interest.

Thus, a simple question as to Keystone XL:

Why not?

The Keystone XL pipeline would

• Ease expansion of environmentally devastating tar sands oil exploitation.
  • Tar Sands exploitation devastates boreal forests, damages Canadian waterways/wetlands, and ravages wildlife populations (including migratory bird populations).
  • As the world faces ever more serious fresh water supply constraints, Tar Sands is one of the energy sources most demanding and destructive of fresh water supplies.
  • Tar Sands, as a fuel source, is significantly more polluting (by every measure) than traditional petroleum fuels.
• Worsen prospects for mitigating climate change
  • One of the world’s leading climate scientists, James Hansen, has said that expanded tar sands production would be “game over” for the climate system and lead to irreversible catastrophic climate chaos.
  • Climate scientists warn that Tar Sands production is beyond reckless in its implications. “If we fully develop the tar sands resources we will certainly lose control of the climate, we will get to a point where we can no walk back from the cliff.”
  • Tar Sands production is up to three times more polluting — just in carbon emissions, alone, without counting boreal forest destruction — than other fossil fuel production.
• Threaten Americans’ health
  • “The Keystone XL could have a significant impact on the health of communities in the tar sands production areas along its route and refinery fence line communities where the heavy sour crude will be processed. In addition, the emissions from tar sands will exacerbate climate change which affects public health much more broadly even than the widespread direct impacts of the tar sands industry.”
• Lead to increased fuel prices for significant numbers of Americans
  • Currently, tar sands imported into the United States are refined mainly in Upper Midwest refineries and oversupply of fuel products there have lead to a lowered crude fuel and consumer prices for much of the Upper Midwest when compared to global oil prices. Keystone XL would move this fuel into the international market and out of American fuel tanks.
  • In fact, tar sands exploiters would see their profits go up, with that cash picked out of American citizens’ pockets.
• Create increased risks of oil pipeline spills
  • The first Keystone pipeline, which is relatively new, has had a large number of leaks.
  • Keystone XL would go through sensitive areas where a pipeline leak could impact sensitive environmental areas and numerous Americans’ health.
  • The product, called Dilbit, is much more dangerous and difficult to clean up in the event of a spill. Even the most cursory look at the industry’s record leads to a simple conclusion: pipeline spills will occur.
• Threaten employment
  • The only significant independent review of the Keystone XL pipeline project’s employment impact creates significant risk for reducing overall employment.
  • Industry claims have been contradictory and do not stand up to even the scantiest of open-minded scrutiny.
  • Industry practices have been, seriously, at odds with their practices and delivered results.
• Hurt America’s prospects for achieving a clean energy future
  • The pipeline would divert attention and resources from other paths and opportunities.
  • The pipeline’s approval feeds into a ‘drill, baby, drill’ mentality that fundamentally fails that increased production is counter to achieving energy security.
• Undermine America’s ability to lead internationally.
  • Addressing climate change will require difficult decisions by individuals, communities, businesses, and nations.  Due to the $100s of billions involved and the power of polluting industries, the correct decision that rejecting Keystone XL is the right thing to do for U.S. national interest has become a difficult decision to make. If the United States is to be a world leader in addressing climate change and if the United States is to have any credibility in asking others to make difficult choices, the United States must show that it can make the correct decision even when it is difficult. As Professor John Abraham put it,
    

    If we don’t say no now, when will we say no?

Very simply, oil industry lobbyist claims to the contrary,

the Keystone XL pipeline is not in the U.S. national interest.